Calculating power without using a calculator, for example $1.05^10$

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1












How to find (or estimate) $1.0003^365$ without using a calculator? Do we have any fast algorithm for cases where base is slightly more than one? Say up to $1.1$ with tick $0.05$.










share|cite|improve this question























  • The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
    – Jimmy R.
    Dec 13 '14 at 17:57






  • 2




    Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
    – Henry
    Dec 13 '14 at 18:09















up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1












How to find (or estimate) $1.0003^365$ without using a calculator? Do we have any fast algorithm for cases where base is slightly more than one? Say up to $1.1$ with tick $0.05$.










share|cite|improve this question























  • The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
    – Jimmy R.
    Dec 13 '14 at 17:57






  • 2




    Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
    – Henry
    Dec 13 '14 at 18:09













up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1






1





How to find (or estimate) $1.0003^365$ without using a calculator? Do we have any fast algorithm for cases where base is slightly more than one? Say up to $1.1$ with tick $0.05$.










share|cite|improve this question















How to find (or estimate) $1.0003^365$ without using a calculator? Do we have any fast algorithm for cases where base is slightly more than one? Say up to $1.1$ with tick $0.05$.







exponentiation mental-arithmetic






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Sep 10 at 18:19









Community♦

1




1










asked Dec 13 '14 at 17:53









Pavel Morozkin

18115




18115











  • The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
    – Jimmy R.
    Dec 13 '14 at 17:57






  • 2




    Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
    – Henry
    Dec 13 '14 at 18:09

















  • The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
    – Jimmy R.
    Dec 13 '14 at 17:57






  • 2




    Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
    – Henry
    Dec 13 '14 at 18:09
















The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
– Jimmy R.
Dec 13 '14 at 17:57




The answer is 1,628894627 and I do not think that there are many easy ways to arrive to this number without using a calculator.
– Jimmy R.
Dec 13 '14 at 17:57




2




2




Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
– Henry
Dec 13 '14 at 18:09





Stretches over for log tables: 105 gives 0212. Then turn page to antilogs .212 gives 1629. So the answer is about $1.629$ since $log_10(1.05) approx 0.0212$, $10log_10(1.05) approx 0.212$, $1.05^10 = 10^10log_10(1.05)approx 1.629$
– Henry
Dec 13 '14 at 18:09











5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










You could try the binomial expansion of $(1+0.05)^10$ and stop calculating terms after they become small enough to not affect your required degree of accuracy






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
    – Grey Matters
    Mar 10 '15 at 3:23


















up vote
3
down vote













$$(1+x)^napprox 1+nxquad(xll1)$$




$$^*(1+x)^n=1+nx+fracn(n-1)2!x^2+fracn(n-1)(n-2)3!x^3+...$$






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Well binomial theorem with some basic algebraic manipulations,I find it easier to play with integers than decimals.
    $$1.05^10=frac105^10100^10=frac5^10cdot21^105^10cdot20^10=frac(20+1)^1020^10=1+frac10cdot20^9+45cdot 20^8+10choose 320^7+cdots+120^10=1+1/2+frac4520^2+frac12020^3+cdots+frac120^10=1.5+0.1125+0.015+cdots+frac120^10approx 1.6275$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      First, learn how to work with base-10 logs in your head, including converting them back and forth. Here's a simple video that will teach you how to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5rgTPu8JcE



      Next, realize that $e$ can be used to approximate such problems. A good understanding of $e$ can be found here: http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/



      Finally, learn to take equations in the form of $e^x$ and convert them into equivalent problems of the form $10^y$: http://headinside.blogspot.com/2014/03/calculate-powers-of-e-in-your-head.html




      To actually work through the problem, multiply the interest (0.05 in your example) times the power (10 in your example), and start by raising $e$ to that power. 0.05 × 10 = 0.50, so we're looking at roughly $e^0.50$.



      We're going to convert this into the form $10^y$, but the conversion method works better with integers, so we should the equivalent of $e^50$, work out $y$ for $10^y$, and then move the decimal place of $y$ two spaces to the left to compensate.



      Using the method from the calculate powers of e tutorial above, $e^50$≈$10^21.715$, so $e^0.50$≈$10^0.21715$. Now, we just have to work out what the base-10 antilogarithm for 0.21715.



      As explained in the youtube link above, a 0.041 difference between logarithms corresponds to a roughly 10% change in the equivalent decimal. 0.217 + 0.041 + 0.041 = 0.299, which is quite close to the base-10 log of 2. Two differences of 0.041 mean two differences of 10%. In short, the answer should be roughly 20% less than 2, which is 1.6.



      OK, this probably isn't a quick a method as you may like, but it does return a decent estimate.






      share|cite|improve this answer



























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        You can use successive squaring.



        $$x^10 = x^2(x^4)^2 = x^2((x^2)^2)^2$$



        so first calculate $x^2$, then save it for later, calculate square two more times and then multiply with the $x^2$ you saved. This will make smaller the number of multiplications you need to do. From 9 down to 4. Will be much more impressive for large powers and powers that are a multiple of two. For example $x^1024$ will require no more than 10 multiplications!






        share|cite|improve this answer




















          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1066550%2fcalculating-power-without-using-a-calculator-for-example-1-0510%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes








          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          8
          down vote



          accepted










          You could try the binomial expansion of $(1+0.05)^10$ and stop calculating terms after they become small enough to not affect your required degree of accuracy






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
            – Grey Matters
            Mar 10 '15 at 3:23















          up vote
          8
          down vote



          accepted










          You could try the binomial expansion of $(1+0.05)^10$ and stop calculating terms after they become small enough to not affect your required degree of accuracy






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
            – Grey Matters
            Mar 10 '15 at 3:23













          up vote
          8
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          8
          down vote



          accepted






          You could try the binomial expansion of $(1+0.05)^10$ and stop calculating terms after they become small enough to not affect your required degree of accuracy






          share|cite|improve this answer














          You could try the binomial expansion of $(1+0.05)^10$ and stop calculating terms after they become small enough to not affect your required degree of accuracy







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 13 '14 at 18:13









          dustin

          6,65592966




          6,65592966










          answered Dec 13 '14 at 18:12









          MidnightMirror80

          984




          984











          • Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
            – Grey Matters
            Mar 10 '15 at 3:23

















          • Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
            – Grey Matters
            Mar 10 '15 at 3:23
















          Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
          – Grey Matters
          Mar 10 '15 at 3:23





          Here's an easy way to work out terms of the binomial expansion with pencil and paper: headinside.blogspot.com/2015/03/…
          – Grey Matters
          Mar 10 '15 at 3:23











          up vote
          3
          down vote













          $$(1+x)^napprox 1+nxquad(xll1)$$




          $$^*(1+x)^n=1+nx+fracn(n-1)2!x^2+fracn(n-1)(n-2)3!x^3+...$$






          share|cite|improve this answer
























            up vote
            3
            down vote













            $$(1+x)^napprox 1+nxquad(xll1)$$




            $$^*(1+x)^n=1+nx+fracn(n-1)2!x^2+fracn(n-1)(n-2)3!x^3+...$$






            share|cite|improve this answer






















              up vote
              3
              down vote










              up vote
              3
              down vote









              $$(1+x)^napprox 1+nxquad(xll1)$$




              $$^*(1+x)^n=1+nx+fracn(n-1)2!x^2+fracn(n-1)(n-2)3!x^3+...$$






              share|cite|improve this answer












              $$(1+x)^napprox 1+nxquad(xll1)$$




              $$^*(1+x)^n=1+nx+fracn(n-1)2!x^2+fracn(n-1)(n-2)3!x^3+...$$







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Dec 13 '14 at 18:25









              RE60K

              13.9k22053




              13.9k22053




















                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  Well binomial theorem with some basic algebraic manipulations,I find it easier to play with integers than decimals.
                  $$1.05^10=frac105^10100^10=frac5^10cdot21^105^10cdot20^10=frac(20+1)^1020^10=1+frac10cdot20^9+45cdot 20^8+10choose 320^7+cdots+120^10=1+1/2+frac4520^2+frac12020^3+cdots+frac120^10=1.5+0.1125+0.015+cdots+frac120^10approx 1.6275$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote













                    Well binomial theorem with some basic algebraic manipulations,I find it easier to play with integers than decimals.
                    $$1.05^10=frac105^10100^10=frac5^10cdot21^105^10cdot20^10=frac(20+1)^1020^10=1+frac10cdot20^9+45cdot 20^8+10choose 320^7+cdots+120^10=1+1/2+frac4520^2+frac12020^3+cdots+frac120^10=1.5+0.1125+0.015+cdots+frac120^10approx 1.6275$$






                    share|cite|improve this answer






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      Well binomial theorem with some basic algebraic manipulations,I find it easier to play with integers than decimals.
                      $$1.05^10=frac105^10100^10=frac5^10cdot21^105^10cdot20^10=frac(20+1)^1020^10=1+frac10cdot20^9+45cdot 20^8+10choose 320^7+cdots+120^10=1+1/2+frac4520^2+frac12020^3+cdots+frac120^10=1.5+0.1125+0.015+cdots+frac120^10approx 1.6275$$






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      Well binomial theorem with some basic algebraic manipulations,I find it easier to play with integers than decimals.
                      $$1.05^10=frac105^10100^10=frac5^10cdot21^105^10cdot20^10=frac(20+1)^1020^10=1+frac10cdot20^9+45cdot 20^8+10choose 320^7+cdots+120^10=1+1/2+frac4520^2+frac12020^3+cdots+frac120^10=1.5+0.1125+0.015+cdots+frac120^10approx 1.6275$$







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Dec 13 '14 at 21:36









                      kingW3

                      10.8k72553




                      10.8k72553




















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          First, learn how to work with base-10 logs in your head, including converting them back and forth. Here's a simple video that will teach you how to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5rgTPu8JcE



                          Next, realize that $e$ can be used to approximate such problems. A good understanding of $e$ can be found here: http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/



                          Finally, learn to take equations in the form of $e^x$ and convert them into equivalent problems of the form $10^y$: http://headinside.blogspot.com/2014/03/calculate-powers-of-e-in-your-head.html




                          To actually work through the problem, multiply the interest (0.05 in your example) times the power (10 in your example), and start by raising $e$ to that power. 0.05 × 10 = 0.50, so we're looking at roughly $e^0.50$.



                          We're going to convert this into the form $10^y$, but the conversion method works better with integers, so we should the equivalent of $e^50$, work out $y$ for $10^y$, and then move the decimal place of $y$ two spaces to the left to compensate.



                          Using the method from the calculate powers of e tutorial above, $e^50$≈$10^21.715$, so $e^0.50$≈$10^0.21715$. Now, we just have to work out what the base-10 antilogarithm for 0.21715.



                          As explained in the youtube link above, a 0.041 difference between logarithms corresponds to a roughly 10% change in the equivalent decimal. 0.217 + 0.041 + 0.041 = 0.299, which is quite close to the base-10 log of 2. Two differences of 0.041 mean two differences of 10%. In short, the answer should be roughly 20% less than 2, which is 1.6.



                          OK, this probably isn't a quick a method as you may like, but it does return a decent estimate.






                          share|cite|improve this answer
























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            First, learn how to work with base-10 logs in your head, including converting them back and forth. Here's a simple video that will teach you how to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5rgTPu8JcE



                            Next, realize that $e$ can be used to approximate such problems. A good understanding of $e$ can be found here: http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/



                            Finally, learn to take equations in the form of $e^x$ and convert them into equivalent problems of the form $10^y$: http://headinside.blogspot.com/2014/03/calculate-powers-of-e-in-your-head.html




                            To actually work through the problem, multiply the interest (0.05 in your example) times the power (10 in your example), and start by raising $e$ to that power. 0.05 × 10 = 0.50, so we're looking at roughly $e^0.50$.



                            We're going to convert this into the form $10^y$, but the conversion method works better with integers, so we should the equivalent of $e^50$, work out $y$ for $10^y$, and then move the decimal place of $y$ two spaces to the left to compensate.



                            Using the method from the calculate powers of e tutorial above, $e^50$≈$10^21.715$, so $e^0.50$≈$10^0.21715$. Now, we just have to work out what the base-10 antilogarithm for 0.21715.



                            As explained in the youtube link above, a 0.041 difference between logarithms corresponds to a roughly 10% change in the equivalent decimal. 0.217 + 0.041 + 0.041 = 0.299, which is quite close to the base-10 log of 2. Two differences of 0.041 mean two differences of 10%. In short, the answer should be roughly 20% less than 2, which is 1.6.



                            OK, this probably isn't a quick a method as you may like, but it does return a decent estimate.






                            share|cite|improve this answer






















                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote









                              First, learn how to work with base-10 logs in your head, including converting them back and forth. Here's a simple video that will teach you how to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5rgTPu8JcE



                              Next, realize that $e$ can be used to approximate such problems. A good understanding of $e$ can be found here: http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/



                              Finally, learn to take equations in the form of $e^x$ and convert them into equivalent problems of the form $10^y$: http://headinside.blogspot.com/2014/03/calculate-powers-of-e-in-your-head.html




                              To actually work through the problem, multiply the interest (0.05 in your example) times the power (10 in your example), and start by raising $e$ to that power. 0.05 × 10 = 0.50, so we're looking at roughly $e^0.50$.



                              We're going to convert this into the form $10^y$, but the conversion method works better with integers, so we should the equivalent of $e^50$, work out $y$ for $10^y$, and then move the decimal place of $y$ two spaces to the left to compensate.



                              Using the method from the calculate powers of e tutorial above, $e^50$≈$10^21.715$, so $e^0.50$≈$10^0.21715$. Now, we just have to work out what the base-10 antilogarithm for 0.21715.



                              As explained in the youtube link above, a 0.041 difference between logarithms corresponds to a roughly 10% change in the equivalent decimal. 0.217 + 0.041 + 0.041 = 0.299, which is quite close to the base-10 log of 2. Two differences of 0.041 mean two differences of 10%. In short, the answer should be roughly 20% less than 2, which is 1.6.



                              OK, this probably isn't a quick a method as you may like, but it does return a decent estimate.






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              First, learn how to work with base-10 logs in your head, including converting them back and forth. Here's a simple video that will teach you how to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5rgTPu8JcE



                              Next, realize that $e$ can be used to approximate such problems. A good understanding of $e$ can be found here: http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-guide-to-exponential-functions-e/



                              Finally, learn to take equations in the form of $e^x$ and convert them into equivalent problems of the form $10^y$: http://headinside.blogspot.com/2014/03/calculate-powers-of-e-in-your-head.html




                              To actually work through the problem, multiply the interest (0.05 in your example) times the power (10 in your example), and start by raising $e$ to that power. 0.05 × 10 = 0.50, so we're looking at roughly $e^0.50$.



                              We're going to convert this into the form $10^y$, but the conversion method works better with integers, so we should the equivalent of $e^50$, work out $y$ for $10^y$, and then move the decimal place of $y$ two spaces to the left to compensate.



                              Using the method from the calculate powers of e tutorial above, $e^50$≈$10^21.715$, so $e^0.50$≈$10^0.21715$. Now, we just have to work out what the base-10 antilogarithm for 0.21715.



                              As explained in the youtube link above, a 0.041 difference between logarithms corresponds to a roughly 10% change in the equivalent decimal. 0.217 + 0.041 + 0.041 = 0.299, which is quite close to the base-10 log of 2. Two differences of 0.041 mean two differences of 10%. In short, the answer should be roughly 20% less than 2, which is 1.6.



                              OK, this probably isn't a quick a method as you may like, but it does return a decent estimate.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered Dec 23 '14 at 22:00









                              Grey Matters

                              76736




                              76736




















                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  You can use successive squaring.



                                  $$x^10 = x^2(x^4)^2 = x^2((x^2)^2)^2$$



                                  so first calculate $x^2$, then save it for later, calculate square two more times and then multiply with the $x^2$ you saved. This will make smaller the number of multiplications you need to do. From 9 down to 4. Will be much more impressive for large powers and powers that are a multiple of two. For example $x^1024$ will require no more than 10 multiplications!






                                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    You can use successive squaring.



                                    $$x^10 = x^2(x^4)^2 = x^2((x^2)^2)^2$$



                                    so first calculate $x^2$, then save it for later, calculate square two more times and then multiply with the $x^2$ you saved. This will make smaller the number of multiplications you need to do. From 9 down to 4. Will be much more impressive for large powers and powers that are a multiple of two. For example $x^1024$ will require no more than 10 multiplications!






                                    share|cite|improve this answer






















                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote









                                      You can use successive squaring.



                                      $$x^10 = x^2(x^4)^2 = x^2((x^2)^2)^2$$



                                      so first calculate $x^2$, then save it for later, calculate square two more times and then multiply with the $x^2$ you saved. This will make smaller the number of multiplications you need to do. From 9 down to 4. Will be much more impressive for large powers and powers that are a multiple of two. For example $x^1024$ will require no more than 10 multiplications!






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      You can use successive squaring.



                                      $$x^10 = x^2(x^4)^2 = x^2((x^2)^2)^2$$



                                      so first calculate $x^2$, then save it for later, calculate square two more times and then multiply with the $x^2$ you saved. This will make smaller the number of multiplications you need to do. From 9 down to 4. Will be much more impressive for large powers and powers that are a multiple of two. For example $x^1024$ will require no more than 10 multiplications!







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered Jul 22 '16 at 19:25









                                      mathreadler

                                      13.9k72058




                                      13.9k72058



























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function ()
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1066550%2fcalculating-power-without-using-a-calculator-for-example-1-0510%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                          );

                                          Post as a guest













































































                                          這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

                                          Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

                                          Strongly p-embedded subgroups and p-Sylow subgroups.